A few days ago, the University of Southern California had its world turned upside down with penalties passed out by the NCAA. When it comes to the Eric Bledsoe saga, Jerry Tipton uses the USC example and an interview with attorney Michael Buckner, to encourage UK to be actively involved instead of looking away.
Here’s a brief excerpt..
[QUOTE]For fees ranging from $1,500 to $10,000 (tip money for an athletics program like Kentucky’s), Buckner will give a school a thick file of information.
So how many schools have hired Buckner to look into a prospect’s past before a program decides to recruit a questionable player?
“None have used me,” he said.
Only after the NCAA starts sniffing do schools hire Buckner and the handful of firms around the country that do similar work.
Buckner saw the NCAA penalizing Southern California last week as a cautionary tale.
“Kentucky fans should look at the SC case as what not to do,” he said. “The NCAA called out SC for not doing their due diligence in monitoring a prospect ([B]O.J. Mayo[/B]) and an enrolled athlete ([B]Reggie Bush[/B]).”
[/QUOTE]You can read [URL=”http://www.kentucky.com/2010/06/12/1304268/uk-basketball-notebook-southern.html”]the full article here…[/URL]
Well, I don’t know what say. I’ve read the entire Tipton article more than once and it’s clear as mud to me. I’m really struggling to see the similarities between the USC case and the concerns around Eric Bledsoe. Tipton also spends a lot of time supporting the credibility of Michael Buckner. He also states that schools tend to hire a lawyer after they get in trouble rather before (just like the rest of us).
What do you guys think?
